One 77-year-old’s search for the truth: 9/11, election fraud, illegal wars, Wall Street criminality, a stolen nuke, the neocon wars, control of the U.S. government by global corporations, the unjustified assault on Social Security, media complicity, and the "Great Recession" about to become the second Great Depression. "The most important truths are hidden from us by the powerful few who strive to steal the American dream by keeping We the People in the dark."

There are clear signs that the Neocons running the
AngloZionist Empire and its “deep state” are in a state of near panic
and their actions indicate they are truly terrified.

The home front

One the home front, the Neocons have resorted to every possible dirty
trick on the book to try to prevent Donald Trump from ever getting into
the White House: they have

organized riots and demonstrations (some paid by Soros money)

encouraged the supporters of Hillary to reject the outcome of the elections (“not my President”)

tried to threaten the Electors and make them either cast a vote for Hillary or not vote at all

tried to convince Congress to refuse the decision of the Electoral College and

they are now trying to get the elections annulled on the suspicion
that the (apparently almighty) Russian hackers have compromised the
election outcome (apparently even in states were paper ballots were
used) and stolen it in favor of Trump.

That is truly an amazing development, especially considering how
Hillary attacked Trump for not promising to recognize the outcome of the
elections. She specifically said that Trump’s lack of guarantees to
recognize the outcome would threaten the very basis of the stability of
the US political system and now she, and her supporters, are doing
everything in their power to do just that, to throw the entire electoral
process into a major crisis with no clear path towards resolution. Some
say that the Democrats are risking a civil war. Considering that
several key Republican Congressmen have said they do support the notion
of an investigation into the “Russian hackers” fairy tale, I submit that
the Republicans are doing exactly the same thing, that this is not a
Democrat vs Republican issue, but a “deep state vs The People of the
USA” issue.

Most experts agree that none of these tactics are going to work. So
this begs the question of whether the Neocons are stupid, whether they
think that they can succeed or what their true objective is.
My guess is that first and foremost what is taking place now is what
always happens when the Neocons run into major trouble: they double
down, again. And again. And again. That is one of the key
characteristics of their psychological make-up: they cannot accept
defeat or, even less so, that they were wrong, so each time reality
catches up to their ideological delusions, they automatically
double-down. Still, they might rationalize this behavior by a
combination of hope that maybe one of these tricks will work, with the
strong urge to do as much damage to President-Elect Trump before he
actually assumes his office. I would never underestimate the vicious
vindictiveness of these people.
What is rather encouraging is Trump’s reaction to all this: after
apparently long deliberations he decided to nominate Rex Tillerson as
his Secretary of Defense. From a Neocon point of view, if General
Michael Flynn was bad, then Tillerson was truly an apocalyptic
abomination: the man actually had received the order of “Friend of Russia” from the hands of Vladimir Putin himself!
Did Trump not realize how provocative this nomination was and how it
would be received by the Neocons? Of course he did! That was, on his
part, a totally deliberate decision. If so, then this is a very, very
good sign.

I might be mistaken, but I get the feeling that Trump is willing to
accept the Neocon challenge and that he will fight back. For example,
his reaction to the CIA accusations about Russian hackers was very
telling: he reminded everybody that “these are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction”. I think that it is now a safe bet to say that as soon as Trump take control heads will roll at the CIA.

[Sidebar: is it not amazing that the CIA is offering its
opinion about some supposed Russian hacking during the elections in the
USA? Since when does the CIA have any expertise on what is going on
inside the USA? I thought the CIA was only a foreign intelligence
agency. And since when does the CIA get involved in internal US
politics? Yes, of course, savvy observers of the USA have always known
that the CIA was a key player in US politics, but now the Agency
apparently does not even mind confirming this openly. I don't think that
Trump will have the guts and means to do so but, frankly, he would be
much better off completely dissolving the CIA. Of course, that could get
Trump killed – messing with the Fed and the CIA are two unforgivable
crimes in the USA – but then again Trump is already very much at risk
anyway, so he might as well strike first].

One the external front

On the external front, the big development is the liberation of
Aleppo by Syrian forces. In that case again, the Neocons tried to
double-down: they made all sorts of totally unsubstantiated claims about
executions and atrocities while the BBC, always willing to pick up the
correct line, published an article about how much the situation in Aleppo is similar to what took place in Srebrenica.
Of course, there is one way in which the events in Aleppo and
Srebrenica are similar: in both cases the US-backed Takfiris lost and
were defeated by government forces and in both cases the West unleashed a
vicious propaganda war to try to turn the military defeat of its
proxies into a political victory for itself. In any case, the last-ditch
propaganda effort failed and preventing the inevitable and Aleppo was
completely liberated.

The Empire did score one success: using the fact that most of the
foreign forces allied to the Syrians Putin will soon liberate Palmyra once again, but until this happens the reoccupation of Palmyra is rather embarrassing for the Syrians, Iranians and Russians. (Hezbollah, Iranian Pasdaran,
Russian Spetsnaz, etc.) were concentrated around Aleppo, the US-backed
Takfiris succeeded in breaking the will of the Syrians, many of whom
apparently fled in panic, and first surrounded and then eventually
reoccupied Palmyra. This will be short lived success as I completely
agree with my friend Alexander Mercouris who says that

It seems exceedingly unlikely to me that the Daesh movement towards
Palmyra was undetected by the various Syrian, Iranian and Russian
intelligence agencies (at least once source
reports that Russian satellites did detect it) and I therefore conclude
that a deliberate decision was made to temporarily sacrifice Palmyra in
order to finally liberate Aleppo. Was that the correct call?
Definitely yes. Contrary to the western propaganda, Aleppo, not
Raqqa, has always been the real “capital” of the US backed terrorists.
Raqqa is a relatively small town: 220,000+ inhabitants versus 2,000,000+
for Aleppo, making Aleppo about ten times larger than Raqqa. As for
tiny Palmyra, its population is 30,000+. So the choice between
scrambling to plug the holes in the Syrian defenses around Palmyra and
liberating Aleppo was a no-brainer. Now that Aleppo has been liberated,
the city has to be secured and major engineering efforts need to be made
in order to prepare it for an always possible Takfiri counter-attack.
But it is one thing to re-take a small desert town and quite another one
to re-take a major urban center. I personally very much doubt that
Daesh & Co. will ever be in control of Aleppo again. Some Neocons
appear to be so enraged by this defeat that they are now accusing Trump of “backing Iran” (I wish he did!).

The tiny Palmyra was given a double-function by the Neocon propaganda
effort: to eclipse the “Russian” (it was not solely “Russian” at all,
but never mind that) victory in Aleppo and to obfuscate the “US” (it was
not solely “US” at all, but never mind that) defeat in Mosul. A hard
task for the tiny desert city for sure and it is no wonder that this
desperate attempt also failed: the US lead coalition in Mosul still
looks just about as weak as the Russian lead coalition looks strong in
Aleppo.

Any comparison between these two battles is simply embarrassing for
the USA: not only did the US-backed forces fail to liberate Mosul from
Daesh & Co. but they have not even full encircled the city or even
managed to penetrate beyond its furthest suburbs. There is very little
information coming out of Mosul, but after three months of combat the
entire operation to liberate Mosul seems to be an abject failure, at
least for the time being. I sincerely hope that once Trump takes office
he will finally agree to work not only with Russia, but also with Iran,
to finally get Daesh out of Mosul. But if Trump delivers on his promise
to AIPAC and the rest of the Israel Lobby gang to continue to antagonize
and threaten Iran, the US can basically forget any hopes of defeating
Daesh in Iraq.
Our of despair and spite, the US propaganda vilified Russia for the
killing of civilians in Aleppo while strenuously avoiding any mention of
civilian victims in Mosul. But then, the same propaganda machine which
made fun of the color of the smoke coming out of the engines of the
Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov (suggesting that she was
about to break down) had to eat humble pie when it was the US navy’s
most expensive and newest destroyer, the USS Zumwalt, which broke down
in the Panama canal and had to be immobilzed, while the Kuznetsov
continued to do a very good job supporting Russian operations in Syria.

Over and over again, the AngloZionist propaganda machine has failed
to obfuscate the embarrassing facts on the ground and it now clearly
appears that the entire US policy for the Middle-East is in total
disarray and that the Neocons are as clueless as they are desperate.

The countdown to January 20th

It is pretty obvious that the Neocon reign is coming to an end in a
climax of incompetence, hysterical finger-pointing, futile attempts at
preventing the inevitable and a desperate scramble to conceal the
magnitude of the abject failure which Neocon-inspired policies have
resulted in. Obama will go down in history as the worst and most
incompetent President in US history. As for Hillary, she will be
remembered as both the worst US Secretary of State the US and the most
inept Presidential candidate ever.

In light of the fact that the Neocons always failed at everything
they attempted, I am inclined to believe that they will probably also
fail at preventing Donald Trump from being sworn in. But until January
20th, 2017 I will be holding my breath in fear of what else these truly demented people could come up with.

As for Trump, I still can’t figure him out. On one hand he nominates
Rex Tillerson in what appears to be a deliberate message of defiance
against the Neocons, while on the other hand he continues to try to
appease the Israel Lobby gang by choosing a rabid Zionist
of the worst kind, David M. Friedman, as the next US ambassador to
Israel. Even worse then that, Donald Trump still does not appear to be
willing to recognize the undeniable fact that the US will never defeat
Daesh as long as the anti-Iranian stance of the Neocons is not replaced
by a real willingness to engage Iran and accept it as a partner and
ally.

Right now the Trump rhetoric simply makes no sense: he wants to
befriend Russia while antagonizing China and he wants to defeat Daesh
while threatening Iran again. This is lunacy. Still, I am willing to
give him the benefit of the doubt, but somebody sure needs to educate
him on the geopolitical realities out there before he also end up making
a total disaster of US foreign policy.
And yet, I still have a small hope.

My hope is that the latest antics of the Neocons will sufficiently
aggravate and even enrage Trump to a point where he will give up on his
futile attempts at appeasing them. Only by engaging in a systematic
policy of “de-neoconization” of the US political establishment will Trump have any hopes of “making America great again”.
If Trump’s plan is to appease the Neocons long enough from him to be
sworn in and have his men approved by Congress – fine. Then he still has
a chance of saving the USA from a catastrophic collapse, but only as
long as he remains determined to ruthlessly crack down on the Neocons
once in power. If his hope is to distract the Neocons by appeasing them
on secondary or minor issues, then his efforts are doomed and he will go
down the very same road as Obama who, at least superficially, initially
appeared to be a non-Neocon candidate and who ended up being a total
Neocon puppet (in 2008 the Neocons had placed their bets on McCain and
they only infiltrated the Obama Administration once McCain was
defeated).

One way or another, we are headed for a crisis, the only open question whether the USA will come out of this crisis liberated or doomed.

ATHENS, Greece — The
post-election climate in the United States has been nothing short of
bizarre. Recount efforts in several states are being championed by Green
Party candidate Jill Stein, accusations have repeatedly been made that
the “Russian menace” influenced the presidential elections and the
victory of Donald Trump, and that Russia is also behind an online
disinformation campaign which the mainstream media describes as “fake news.”

One of the websites accused of
delivering “fake news” is that of former assistant secretary of the U.S.
Treasury under President Ronald Reagan, Paul Craig Roberts.
An author and analyst and former Wall Street Journal editor, Roberts
has become a vocal critic of neoliberalism, austerity, and those who
seek confrontation with Russia and China.

In this interview, originally aired on Dec. 8 on Dialogos Radio,
Roberts discusses Trump’s electoral victory and Hillary Clinton’s
defeat, what interests may be behind the electoral recount efforts, the
“Brexit” vote and recent Italian referendum result, and the conflict in
Syria. He also shares his reaction to the accusations of delivering
“fake news.”

MintPress News (MPN): Why did Donald Trump win the election, and
what does a Trump presidency mean for the United States and for the
world?

Paul Craig Roberts (PCR): We don’t
know yet what it will mean. We know what we hope it will mean. Trump won
because he spoke directly to the people in a way that they haven’t
experienced in my lifetime. He told them that the ruling oligarchy did
not and would not have their interests in mind, that they had been sold
out with the oligarchy moving their jobs offshore to where labor is
cheaper while still expecting from the unemployed American workforce to
buy the products that are brought in from China and Indonesia and India
and elsewhere. This resonated with people, as they have been
experiencing this now for roughly a quarter of a century. There’s been
no growth in real median family income in decades. Young people can’t
find jobs to support an independent existence. The value of a university
education is collapsing because there is no employment for that type of
an education, and people realize that the economic policy of the
country has been captured by the oligarchs and serves only a very few
interests. The consequence has been a massive change in the distribution
of income inside the United States. The United States now has one of
the worst income distributions in the world. In fact, it’s worse than
income distributions in many Third World gangster states.

[Trump] spoke directly to these
things. He also said that he would not see the point of conflict with
Russia, which no one sees in an era of thermonuclear weapons, and he
also said that he didn’t understand the function of NATO, 25 years after
the Soviet collapse. This also resonated with the public, because they
understand that all of these supposed threats are bleeding them in order
to put hundreds of billions of dollars into armaments industries.
That’s the reason why he won the election, and the reason we are hopeful
is that we assume he is sincere about this. We assume he’s sincere
because of the fierce opposition he has from the ruling oligarchy and
from their media “presstitutes,” who did anything they could to demonize
Trump, to turn him into a “Putin agent,” and so forth. But the public
ignored them, or at least enough of the public ignored them for Trump to
carry almost all of the states except for a few really large cities on
the coast.

MPN: Do you believe President-elect Trump will keep his campaign
promises, and what do you make of his Cabinet selections thus far?

PCR: We don’t know if he will be able
to. The oligarchy’s candidate, Hillary Clinton, lost, so the oligarchy
lost the election, but they did not lose it by such a great margin that
they’ve given up. They’re still in the fight, they’re still there. Trump
has a billion dollars but they have trillions. They’re
well-established. They have many, many servants and think tanks and
university faculty and the media [on their side], and of course, the
neoconservatives, who have dominated American foreign policy since the
Clinton regime. So they’re still there, and Trump is in combat with
these people.Trump’s appointments, we don’t know whether they will support what he wants to do or not. If they
support him, they are the type of people he needs. They are well-to-do,
they’re self-confident, they don’t need money from the oligarchs, they
don’t have to worry about their careers when they leave government. So
he does have the kind of person you’ve got to have if you’re president,
to bring about any change. So the real question is, will they support
him or will they go with the oligarchs? We don’t know. We’ll have to
wait and see what happens. We can’t judge them based on their past
associations. I don’t think any of them are actual representatives of an
oligarch’s agenda. So there’s a chance they will support him and that
they will be strong enough people that he’ll have the government that
will actually do something. But you can’t take it for granted, because
as I said, the oligarchs lost but they weren’t routed. They’re still
there.

MPN: What would a Hillary Clinton victory have meant for the
United States and the world, particularly in terms of foreign policy?

PCR: It would have meant war with
Russia and China and the end of life on Earth. She’s an insane
warmonger, she demonizes Russia and the president of Russia, calling him
the “new Hitler.” She said that the South China Sea is an area of the
United States’ national interest. You can’t be more provocative than
this, and if you have a president who convinces Russia and China that
they’re going to be attacked, they’re not going to sit there and wait.
So we really have escaped Armageddon by the defeat of Hillary Clinton.
This would have been the worst possible outcome imaginable. Of course,
it would have been bad on the other score — jobs, I mean, she’s the
agent of the big banks, they made her rich! She and her husband have a
personal fortune of $120 million, given to them by the oligarchs, and
their foundation has $1.6 billion, also given to them but not just by
domestic oligarchs, but by oligarchs abroad. [The Clintons] sold
influence for money.

MPN: What is your reaction to the recount effort being led by Jill Stein? Who do you believe is behind all of these efforts?

PCR: The oligarchs, obviously. I
mean, Jill Stein couldn’t get any funding for her presidential campaign,
but she instantly got something like five or six or seven times the
amount of funding she got for her entire campaign, for the recount!
Where did that money come from? Not her supporters. And what this is
about … the oligarchs were positioned to steal the election for Hillary.
But they got deceived by their own propaganda, that she was the shoo-in
winner, The New York Times telling them that it was 94 percent certain
that she would be elected. They didn’t bother to steal the election,
because they didn’t think they needed to. And they were shocked,
everyone was shocked — that is, not the people voting for him, but the
media, the oligarchs, the established interests. They were shocked by
the election results, and so they’ve used Jill Stein, who really has no
standing in this issue, since it doesn’t involve her campaign, she has
no chance of benefiting from a vote recount. So they’re using this
corrupt woman, who sold out the Green Party, to try and throw a monkey
wrench into the Electoral College. The only states being recounted are
the three that he won which he wasn’t expected to win [Michigan,
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin], and his margin in these three states is not
very great. They’re not recounting votes in states that he lost by
small margins, only where he won by small margins. This is an effort to steal the election from the working class who elected him, and Jill Stein is part of it.

MPN: One of the reactions of the mainstream media has been to
attack online news outlets which they claim are delivering so-called
“fake news.” Your website was included on this list of alleged “fake
news sites.” What’s your response to these claims, and who do you
believe are the true purveyors of fake news?

PCR: We know the true purveyors are
the media, the press prostitutes. We call them “presstitutes.” The
mainstream media throughout the West is totally corrupt and has no
integrity. What you see happening is that the independent internet media
is taking away the oligarchy’s control over the explanations that
people receive. So everywhere you see the subscription rates of
newspapers falling dramatically, the viewers of TV programs falling
dramatically, and internet readership rising. And so this is an effort
to try to discredit the people who actually tell the truth by
identifying them with Russia. They are hoping that all the demonization
of Russia during Obama’s second term has aroused fears that the “Russian
menace” is back, and they’re hoping this fear is substantial and that
by associating those of us who challenge their lies, with Russia, they
will discredit us.

Who’s funding it? We don’t know,
because the people who prepared this list, no one knows who they are.
When the Washington Post gave it [the group PropOrNot]
all that publicity, they very carefully did not say who these people
are. It is a new internet site that didn’t exist before a couple of
months ago. Who is funding it? I would say the National Endowment for
Democracy, which is a U.S. State Department-funded [organization]. It
could be the CIA. It could be George Soros. But it is an oligarch
operation, which, of course, involves the military-security complex,
because they are the greatest beneficiaries, in terms of money and
power, of all the threats, all the wars. They want a Russian threat, for
their budgets and for their police state powers. Those are the people
who are most likely funding it, but it hasn’t worked! All it did was to
provide people with 200 sites they could go to, to find out what the
truth is!

I think it’s failed, but it shows the
desperation of the oligarchs, and what they will do now is, they will
use the people they still control, in the House and the Senate — the
oligarchs will get some type of legislation passed that will put
pressure on people who dissent from official lines of the oligarchy,
that dissent from stories they plant in the “presstitute” media. And so
it’s going to be perhaps harder to express dissent or tell the truth in
the United States, but we’ll just have to see what they do to Trump.
Some people say that he was always a fake, but that doesn’t make sense
to me because the oligarchs didn’t need him when they had Hillary. And
they clearly didn’t want Trump in the
election. They tried to deny him the Republican nomination, and then
they used the media against him in very vicious ways during the
presidential campaign. Trump said once that he believes in revenge, and I
hope he does. I hope he exacts revenge on the oligarchs.

MPN: What has been the aftermath of the Brexit vote for Britain,
and have the doom-and-gloom scenarios regarding the impact on the
British economy come to fruition?

PCR: No, of course not. The opposite!
What’s happened with Brexit is, I think it’s been overturned. The
United States is not going to permit Brexit, Washington won’t permit it.
Now, this may change with Trump, but under Obama, you may remember he
traveled to London to tell the British prime minister to forget all
about leaving the EU. The EU is a creation of the CIA. It was created so
that the United States could more easily maintain control of Europe.
It’s easier to control the EU Commission than to control 20-something
different governments. What has happened is, the United States
government used three corrupt British judges that decided, “Well, the
people may have voted, but you did not really have to pay attention to
them, it’s all up to Parliament and Parliament can decide that we’re not
[leaving].” And, of course, Washington is now lobbying the Parliament
very hard, with promises and money and, no doubt, threats.

So I don’t think Brexit will happen,
it’s being overturned. The notion that it would take two years to get
out — when that came out, instantly I said, “They’ll never get out.” Two
years is all Washington needs to overturn it. I think it’s already
overturned with that court ruling. So we had three two-bit punk judges
overruling the majority vote of the British people, and they call it
democracy! What kind of democracy is it? That’s not a democracy, when
three two-bit punk judges who don’t amount to anything overrule the
majority vote of the British people! And they call it democracy, oh boy!
What a joke! There are not any democracies in the West. Europe is a
collection of American vassals. It’s been that way since World War II.

MPN: Italian voters recently voted no in a referendum on
amendments to the nation’s constitution. What does this vote, in your
estimation, mean for Italy and for Europe?

PCR: It’ll end up being overturned,
like the Brexit vote. Just like they are trying to overturn Trump’s
election! I mean, that’s what this vote recount is about. It’s the
oligarchy trying to overturn the people’s will, just like the three
judges in Britain, like what happened in Greece [in the July 2015
referendum]. The vote, in itself, doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.
Brexit hasn’t happened, I don’t think it ever will. We don’t even know
if Trump is going to be president. But that’s the whole purpose of the
vote recount, to block it. They wouldn’t be doing it otherwise. They’ve
got all kinds of agents to use, all kinds of things to do.

One of our best journalists, Chris
Hedges, who has had to go independent because the prostitute media no
longer will publish his work … he’s concluded that elections can’t
change anything, only revolution
can change things. I think that’s what the oligarchy is proving. They
are proving that you can’t change things with elections, because it’s
really not a democracy, it’s a facade, and when the people vote, in come
the oligarchs and they overturn it one way or the other. How will they
overturn the vote in Italy? I don’t know, but they’ll overturn it, or
they’ll ignore it, or some judge will rule that Italian law is subject
to EU law, that EU law is supreme. They can do all kinds of things.

MPN: Do you believe that we are heading toward that revolution that Chris Hedges spoke of?

PCR: I don’t know. It depends on the
people. They don’t seem to be nearly as feisty as they used to be. In
previous times in the United States, when we reached this kind of
situation, the government was scared of the people and had to make
concessions. I don’t see the government afraid of the people today.
They’ve got a police state established, they’ve got internment camps
built, they’ve militarized the police, the police are as well armed as
the military, the police routinely shoot people down the streets. I just
don’t know how hard the people have to be pressed. Maybe they just
simply will cease to have any gain in their living standards and some
slight declines over time but won’t actually be facing starvation and
homelessness, as they have in the past. So who knows? I don’t know. But I
don’t think they will succeed in changing anything with elections.
Possibly, Trump being the kind of very strong-willed, determined,
ego-type person that he is, that’s the kind of person you need for a
leader if things are going to be changed. You can’t have some
conciliatory, shrinking violet who wants to get along with everybody.
You can’t get change out of that.

It could well be that Trump is
already rich, he doesn’t need any more money, he has a big ego, and he
wants to go down in history as the man who saved America, “Trump the
Great.” So if he has that kind of a goal, then the oligarchs are up
against a real formidable president. If he can find other people to back
him, we can get some change. But it remains to be seen. We can’t know
that in advance. That’s the hope. What the result is, we don’t know, but
that’s the hope. The hope is … Trump has a huge ego, wants to be “Trump
the Great,” wants to save America, and that that’s more important than
having a few more billion dollars, that he doesn’t care about all these
people, these oligarchs, they haven’t supported him. So maybe something
will happen, we’ll just have to see. Maybe they’ll prove Chris Hedges
wrong. But it’s hard to bet one way or another.

MPN: What’s your take on recent developments in Syria, including
the attempted invasion of Syria by Turkish troops, and what do you
believe we’ll see in Syria going forward in light of a Trump presidency?

PCR: As far as I can tell, the
Russians and Syrians have won that war. They’ve defeated the
Washington-supported ISIS. The Obama regime sent ISIS to Syria to
overthrow [Syrian President Bashar] Assad when the Russians prevented
our involvement. So that way we can pretend we don’t have anything to do
with it. But I think the Russians, as I said, defeated ISIS. I think it
could have happened much sooner, but [Russian President Vladimir] Putin
kept pulling out, kept trying to appease the Europeans, hoping they
would see they didn’t need to be American puppet states, but he seems
now to have finished the job, more or less. I don’t think the Turks
would be permitted to invade Syria, the Russians would just tell them
no. And, I don’t think the Turks think they are a match for Russia or
that the Turks are stupid enough to think Europe and the United States
are going to come to their aid if they get in a war with Russia.

These nuclear weapons are very, very
powerful. Russia can wipe out all of Europe in a few minutes. For these
itty-bitty European politicians to be running around fomenting trouble
with Russia, they’ve got to be insane. There’s no way Europe can come
out of this. The same with the United States. Here we are demonizing
Russia and China. These are powerful nuclear powers. We can’t possibly
survive a conflict with them, no one can. It’s all insanity, it’s
nonsense. Europe is unable to produce leadership that’s intelligent.
Putin, he’s intelligent. For some reason the Chinese can produce
intelligent leadership. Who in Europe has intelligent leadership?
Nobody. Maybe we finally have it with Trump, we don’t know yet. But
there’s not any intelligent leadership, none in Europe.

The Conspiracy to Shut Down Truth, Donald Trump, and The American People

The Conspiracy to Shut Down Truth, Donald Trump, and The American People

Paul Craig Roberts

There is circumstantial evidence that the Washington Post, the New
York Times, and the rest of the presstitute media are part of a
conspiracy with the oligarchs, the military/security complex, the
Hillary Democrats, and neoconized Republicans to shut down the dissident
Internet alternative media and to deny Donald Trump the presidency.

Consider the brand new website PropOrNot and its fake news list of
200 Internet Russian agents. PropOrNot is a website hidden behind
multiple screens as would be an offshore tax avoidance scheme. In other
words, no known, responsible entity is behind the site, which has
libeled 200 other websites, or if it is, it is too ashamed of what it is
doing to be associated with it publicly.

Consider the expertise and money required to shield the identity of
an organization, whether tax avoidance or website. This is not
something that just anyone can do. This type of Klingon cloaking
requires real money or the CIA.

As long as it pretends to be a newspaper, the Washington Post is
subject to journalistic ethics. But the PropOrNot story by Craig
Timberg violated journalistic ethics. Unsupported accusations were
leveled against 200 websites, a McCarthyism record.

How did a story, which would have been instantly quashed by editors
in my day as a Wall Street Journal editor get past Timberg’s editor?That is the question.

Here we have the Post committing libel against 200 websites, all of whom can sue for damages. There go Bezos’ billions.

Would a Washington Post editor of any intelligence have published
such a libel-inviting story unless the owner, Bezos, gave the OK or the
order?

How can the Washington Post feel secure in an act of libel?

Is it because Bezos is protected by his reported membership on a US
government committee, along with the Google CEO, that is believed to
conspire against the privacy of the American people?

PropOrNot would have amounted to nothing except for the Washington
Post. Craig Timberg’s story was written as if PropOrNot was the real
goods. Yet, Timberg does not reveal who is behind PropOrNot.

Add to this picture the hyping by the Washington Post, New York
Times, and TV presstitutes of the unattributed CIA charge that Russia
hacked the Hillary emails and used them to elect Trump with the help of
Russian agent websites. This fake news charge is challenged by Wikileaks
and by a number of experts who asked why unattributed allegations are
accepted in the place of evidence, and the charge is not supported by
the FBI. How do we know that the alleged unattributed CIA charges are
actually made by the CIA or whether there is consensus within the
agency?

How can the presstitutes, such as the NYT and Washington Post give us
all these claims without a shred of evidence or any attribution to the
CIA officials allegedly reporting the story? What kind of journalism is
this?

The conspiracy against truth and against president-elect Trump is
real. The oligarchs and their presstitutes, rogue elements of the CIA
and the neocon establishment hope to drag alternative media before
McCarthyite congressional hearings run by the American hegemonists who
want power over the world.

Whatever you think of Trump, clearly the oligarchs who rule us fear
him. The oligarchs are trying to keep Trump out of the presidency, and
they are trying to associate truthful reporting with foreign influence.

Dear viewers,Much has been made through this election cycle about "fake news."Just last week, the Washington Post reported that much of this fake news "got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign.” The Post promoted a report by a shadowy group called PropOrNot, which accused hundreds of sites of publishing pro-Russia propaganda - some of which are sites that The Real News believes to be verifiable, independent journalism.What the Post failed to mention is that corporate news is the biggest fake news of all. Between the failure to report on devastating climate change, the lack of information about the push for regime change (and a potential war) in Iran, and the inadequate coverage of who has been responsible for the economic crisis in the US, it's corporate news that's failed Americans the most.For more on this, you can watch Paul Jay's interview with journalist Abby Martin.Independent, fact-based media is needed more than ever. Please consider making a tax deductible donation today. Without you, we can't make Real News.
_____________________ ⍐ _______________________

Here below, the blogger has captured the video from the YouTube mentioned on the still shot above.

About Me

B.S. in Physics, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1960 Ph.D. in Physics, Brown University, 1966. Fellow, American Physical
Society. Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Fellow, American Ceramic Society. Member, Geological Society of America, Research Physicist at Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Washington, DC,
1967-2001. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México, 1997. Invited Professor of Research at Universités
de Paris-6 & 7, Lyon-1, et St-Etienne (France) and Tokyo Institute
of Technology, 2000-2004. Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and
Engineering, University of Arizona, 2004-2005. Consultancy: impactGlass
research international, 2005-present.
Winner, one national and two international research awards and honored
by Brown University with a "Distinguished Graduate School Alumnus
Award." Author, 198 papers in peer-reviewed journals and books, Principal Author of 114 of these.